Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29063679›Full record

ArticleMolecular oncology2018

Estrogen receptor mutations and splice variants determined in liquid biopsies from metastatic breast cancer patients.

Nick Beije, Anieta M Sieuwerts, Jaco Kraan, Ngoc M Van, Wendy Onstenk, Silvia R Vitale, Michelle van der Vlugt-Daane, Luc Y Dirix, Anja Brouwer, Paul Hamberg and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Biomolecules · 2020
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Circulating tumor cellsTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Circulating tumour cell isolation, analysis and clinical application.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Combinatorial Power of cfDNA, CTCs and EVs in Oncology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Nick BeijeErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Anieta M SieuwertsErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaco KraanErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ngoc M VanErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Wendy OnstenkErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Silvia R VitaleErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Michelle van der Vlugt-DaaneErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Luc Y DirixTranslational Cancer Research Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Center GZA Hospital Sint Augustinus, Antwerp, Belgium.
Anja BrouwerTranslational Cancer Research Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Center GZA Hospital Sint Augustinus, Antwerp, Belgium.
Paul HambergDepartment of Internal Medicine, Franciscus Gasthuis, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Felix E de JonghDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ikazia Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Agnes JagerErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Caroline M SeynaeveErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Maurice P H M JansenErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
John A FoekensErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
John W M MartensErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Stefan SleijferErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Genomics Netherlands, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLGZA Ziekenhuizen Campus Sint-Augustinus · BEIkazia Ziekenhuis · NLSint Franciscus Gasthuis · NLUniversity of Catania · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mutations and splice variants in the estrogen receptor (ER) gene, ESR1, may yield endocrine resistance in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. These putative endocrine resistance markers are likely to emerge during treatment, and therefore, its detection in liquid biopsies, such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA), is of great interest. This research aimed to determine whether ESR1 mutations and splice variants occur more frequently in CTCs of MBC patients progressing on endocrine treatment. In addition, the presence of ESR1 mutations was evaluated in matched cfDNA and compared to CTCs. CellSearch-enriched CTC fractions (≥5/7.5 mL) of two MBC cohorts were evaluated, namely (a) patients starting first-line endocrine therapy (n = 43, baseline cohort) and (b) patients progressing on any line of endocrine therapy (n = 40, progressing cohort). ESR1 hotspot mutations (D538G and Y537S/N/C) were evaluated in CTC-enriched DNA using digital PCR and compared with matched cfDNA (n = 18 baseline cohort; n = 26 progressing cohort). Expression of ESR1 full-length and 4 of its splice variants (∆5, ∆7, 36 kDa, and 46 kDa) was evaluated in CTC-enriched mRNA. It was observed that in the CTCs, the ESR1 mutations were not enriched in the progressing cohort (8%), when compared with the baseline cohort (5%) (P = 0.66). In the cfDNA, however, ESR1 mutations were more prevalent in the progressing cohort (42%) than in the baseline cohort (11%) (P = 0.04). Three of the same mutations were observed in both CTCs and cfDNA, 1 mutation in CTCs only, and 11 in cfDNA only. Only the ∆5 ESR1 splice variant was CTC-specific expressed, but was not enriched in the progressing cohort. In conclusion, sensitivity for detecting ESR1 mutations in CTC-enriched fractions was lower than for cfDNA. ESR1 mutations detected in cfDNA, rarely present at the start of first-line endocrine therapy, were enriched at progression, strongly suggesting a role in conferring endocrine resistance in MBC.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsCell-Free Nucleic AcidsCohort StudiesDisease ProgressionEstrogen AntagonistsEstrogen Receptor alphaFemaleHumansLiquid BiopsyMiddle AgedMutationNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingProtein IsoformsTamoxifenCell-Free Nucleic AcidsESR1 protein, humanEstrogen AntagonistsEstrogen Receptor alphaProtein IsoformsTamoxifencell-free DNAcirculating tumor cellsendocrine resistanceESR1 mutations

Identifiers

PMID29063679
PMCPMC5748489
OpenAlexW2766133222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.